 |
|  |
 |
|
Zero
|
 |
Bouncing back and forth
Sep 2002 time: 00:33
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Anun Ik Oba
In FPS games, there's all kinds of 'cheap' tactics. Spawn camping; offense sniping; use of certain weapons in excess; etc.
|
Nah I disagree. Spawn camping isnt dishonroable play, but most FPS game has anti spawn camp measures. In Team Fortress for example, if you can beat the system and lob a nail grenade or mirv into spawn point... or enter thru the door and flush the room out before you get killed by automated defense system... , I think you deserve the kill.
In UT2K3, spawn camping is all too easy on deathmatch. But thats the point in that game. Nonstop action. I dont think its cheap cause in that game, ur supposed to be in action instantly at any moment.
Nor is offensive sniping cheap. Usually its camping mofos thats consdiered cheap. Thats not cheap either though...
quote:
Sometimes its just players whining about getting PWND, but other times its just dishonorable play. |
agreed. But this thread is basically dicussing that. What do you think is the difference between thoe two lines is basically what we should be talking about.
quote: In TFT cheap is elf going Beastmaster/Naga every fookin game. | they nerfed beastmaster. Still good though. Ive been hearing about new gossips on how dark ranger is the new queen biatch of creeping....
still not cheap though IMO. Best hero to choose cause its the most effective? yes. Cheap? I wouldnt go that far.
Last edited by Zero on 07-01-2004 at 04:51
|
|
|  |
 |
|
da_hal
|
|
i think it is important to define cheap. imho, cheap is:
1. something that cannot be defended against, eg. drop hacks in diablo 2, cheese kills in sf2alpha+, etc.
2. only in multiplayer. by definition, something you do by yourself should not be "cheap."
3. takes all the strategy and boils it down to just 1-2 options. for example, the zerg rush requires specific anti-rush measures that eliminates other types of play.
4. is fully supported by the programmers. for example, in ultima 4, you can reboot the game if i goes bad, and "journey onward" from the previous save. in epyx' "rogue", however, save games are erased once loaded, and if you die, the character is gone, thus making backup copies of your save is 'cheap.' (although if done alone, it shouldn't be by rule 2.)
5. cannot be used as an excuse for stupidity or noobity. for example, in chess, the 4 move and 2 move checkmate is in just about every single book ever written, thus falling for it is not the fault of the doer, but the victim.
6. something that is generally regarded as 'cheap' is given de-facto immunity if used in defense of a more 'cheap' strategy. for example, in d2, a slow burizazon is considered a "cheap" build, thus a less "cheap" build built to kill them is not cheap when used for this situation. also, a marine rush when used vs a zerg rush.
7. does not exist in tournament or money play. just win baby.
feel free to discuss.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Cheap, in Red Faction:
(1) spawnkilling
(2) "green teaming" (a glitch that ****s up the game if you take flags while you're green)
(3) modding (cheating), but then claiming that "oh it's not rapidfire or flying" makes it okay. THEY CALL IT CHEATING FOR A REASON DUMBASSES!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
da_hal
|
|
lil' clarification:
cheap: what we are trying to define here.
cheat: this would probably come as a corollary to #4: if programmers insist that they did not expect/want it to be done, it is a cheat. so, there is a difference between say open bnet vs closed bnet, where on one side it would be cheap (yet more or less ignored by programmers) vs a cheat (where programmers spend days/weeks trying to patch it.)
exploit: taking advantage of the AI. in 99.99999% of games, the AI has some weakness or another. while AI's get better all the time, it will never be perfect, much less good. the classic exploit is doing something stupid and the AI isn't programmed with the proper response (in any Earth map 4X fortifying antartica or australia, for example.)
i disagree with the ino example. because of the difficulty of the move, not anybody can do it, so to my list:
8. is widely used. If only the minority of people can do it, even though the majority of people know the underlying "moves," then that is the definition of skill, not cheap. For example, Dragon's lair had 1 button and only four possible joystick moves. You could master the basics in less than 5 minutes. However, could you do the entire game blindfolded? (i've heard of it, and i don't think that guy was being cheap.)
as a corollary:
8a. is not available to the general population through ebay, a hack site, or "secret code." For example, you can "buy" an elite d2 char through ebay which will enable you to win the majority of duels, even though you could never build that character yourself.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
pg
|
|
cheap is a relative term as shown by this thread. i'd say there's very few things if anything that is considered "cheap" at the highest skill levels of play in say quake 3 or warcraft 3. less skilled/less competitive players seem to find much more things cheap as shown by the mentioning of spawn fragging(i thought people got over this years ago).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
da_hal
|
|
heh this is the most interesting thread i've seen in years. 
i have no idea what spawn fragging is, so can't comment.
the idea of camping brings up another idea: isn't the ability to uproot a camped unit(s) a skill? eg. this appears to belong with rule 5. I can't uproot camped units, therefore, if somebody uses it against me, it is cheap. I remember this idea back in command hq, where units could fortify themselves, thus learning how to uproot them was vital. I also uprooted all defensive units in mechcommander as well (usually, if it was AI, through an exploit, like luring 1-2 units away with a bait unit into a trap.)
one counter measure: hmm, i can see how this would not be cheap. in simpler games, such as say connect-4, which does not have many options towards the endgame, there are forced moves that in other circumstances would be considered cheap. Lets say that if the 1 counter measure makes the game incredibly boring, that's cheap? In warcraft 1, we would often play without elementals/demons, because it limited play too much (first person to build them usually won, and the only defense was your own, so games became a race for them.)
settler trick: a couple of ideas:
1. as i recall, money wasn't that important, once you got railroads (through the settler exploit, hehe) you often had more money than you could spend anyway. even legitly through trade routes, money was not that hard to come by.
2. even though that trick results in 200% profit, the computer players on warlord level had 1/3 production and upkeep costs, making it greater than 200%, thus it does not nullify the computer's advantage. it would be the equivalent of playing on king level without using the trick (since at king level, the ai and player's production was equal.) thus, by rule #2, is not cheap.
3. since programmers did remove it later, it was a cheat, not cheap, by definition.
the greenskins example brings up another idea: honor. if the players involved propose ground rules that are accepted by all opponents, breaking those rules are "cheap." this seems to hold true for most examples i can think of, although heavily rooted in the noobity rule. Most noobs define honor through word of mouth, thus is often inaccurate, which is why they are most guilty of slinging the "cheap" tag around: they have no idea what the ground rules are to begin with.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Well, spawnkilling by itself is "okay". If you're running for the other team flag and a jackass spawns right in your path, it's acceptable to mow them down. But camping behind the spawnpoint to kill them immediately is DEFINITELY bad, and on most servers doing it for a long time and nothing else will get your sorry ass kicked.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
quote: i have no idea what spawn fragging is, so can't comment. |
In an FPS (first person shooter) game, as a character dies, there are predefined "spawn locations" on a map where his new life will start over. Spawn fragging is when you kill them immediately after they start, and spawn camping is when you stay behind the spawnpoint and shoot as they come.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
da_hal
|
|
re: spawnfragging
in team games, wouldn't it be logical, if one team is spawnfragging, for the other team to do spawnguarding?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
quote: in team games, wouldn't it be logical, if one team is spawnfragging, for the other team to do spawnguarding? |
But then no real advancement can happen because both teams are just racking up the dead spawn.
Also on many maps theres less spawn points than (in large games) players. So in a map with 16 players and only 5 spawn spots (per team), 5 players of a team could be dispatched to kill new spawn while the other 3 go get the flag. A spawnee who could jump around and shoot his camper would be very lucky and probably not get throguh.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33. Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|